Premium
Vacuolar Lucifer Yellow Uptake in Plants: Endocytosis or Anion Transport; A Critical Opinion
Author(s) -
Robinson D. G.,
Hedrich R.
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
botanica acta
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.871
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1438-8677
pISSN - 0932-8629
DOI - 10.1111/j.1438-8677.1991.tb00227.x
Subject(s) - endocytosis , probenecid , vacuole , pinocytosis , membrane transport , cytosol , chemistry , plant cell , microbiology and biotechnology , vesicle , lucifer yellow , biophysics , biochemistry , biology , membrane , cell , intracellular , cytoplasm , pharmacology , gene , gap junction , enzyme
Because of its membrane‐impermeant‐properties Lucifer Yellow‐CH (LY) is regarded by animal cell biologists as an ideal tracer for fluid‐phase endocytosis. When presented to plant cells or protoplasts this fluoroprobe accumulates in the vacuole. On the other hand there are many cases where LY does not enter the vacuole when loaded into the plant cytosol. These, superficially divergent, results have previously been explained in terms of endocytosis whereby access to the vacuole is considered to occur through vesicle transport. This interpretation has now been challenged in three recent papers where the benzoic acid derivative, probenecid, has been shown to prevent vacuolar LY accumulation in plants. Since probenecid is a well‐known inhibitor of organic anion transport in animal cells it has been argued that anion carriers capable of transporting LY might also exist at the plasma membrane and tonoplast of plant cells. Unfortunately probenecid has rarely, if ever, been used in plant transport studies. The fact that it is a weak acid, whose inhibitory effects are observed at concentrations of around 1 mM suggests that caution should prevail when interpreting results obtained with probenecid. The purpose of this article is therefore to highlight the current controversy surrounding LY uptake by plants and to critically evaluate the recent probenecid data.